Lexington weekly intelligencer. (Lexington, Mo.) 1871-1887, 1887-02-26
souri,? Without concealment. Openly
and n%otoriouslY.

law-there it is upon the statute book
of the state.
But is it unjust? Is it unwise? We
do not assert it of this company, be-
cause we do not know, but the ten
dency of these corporations within
corporations has been to enrich a
favored few at the expense of the
common stockholders, and the purpose
| of the constitution was doubtless to
! prevent frauds of that kind, in addl-
ton to preventing the powerful rail-
way corporation from becoming, upon
the open market, a competitor against
the weak individuals upon its line, who
are entitled to its unprecedented service
as a common carrier. We have neither
| the time nor space to enter into the
| ethics Of the case here. A mere state
mept of it makes them apparent. We
have no feeling against the Lexington
Coal Company 1--WE are not interested
in coal to the amount of n dollar) ION
the contrary we would be glad to see
it prosper to the greatest extent, were
it but law fully constituted. There are
two great evils in that it is not 80 con-
stituted. ~ The moral wrong, that
the open and notorious violation OF
law by a wealthy and intelligent cor
p~oration, is a pernicious example to
the ignorant and vicious who are con-
stantly looking for C IL to trample
the laws under foot. CO. That so long
as the railway company itself is in the
coal business it amounts to a mOnopo-
ly; no one else has an equal chance
with it; and not only our coal opera
tors are kept within the limits of a
small retail business, but the value of
every acre of coal land contiguous to
the road is deprecated, from the fact
that no private person can hope to
compete with the company's mines.
1t NAV be said that all this is hostile
| to the interests of Mr.. Gould. 1t is
nothing of the kind. What difference
| does it make to us whether Mr.. Gould,
or Mr.. Blackstone, Or Mr.. Joy, or
Mr.. Vanderbilt make the money out
of the railroad business Of this commu-
nifty? Not ore cent. Mr.. Gould is
primarily in the transportation bust
ness. 1t is his province to haul freights.
| We believe that if he had dealt with
these questions himself they would
have been settled ere now; but perso-
nal animosities have been permitted to
interfere where they should not. We
are free to say that we are but little in
terested in them from either side. What
we want to see is, a big coal business
done out of Lexington. Instead of
the six or seven hundred n that
we now have there should be, and could
easily be, two thousand men employ
ed from Wellington to Lexington. con-
verting our river bluffs into a success
sion Of hives of industry, with the
American principle exempliied that
the rights of the weak are protected
against the rapacity of the strong,
The question is asked, "Would you
prevent the railroad company from
supplying itself with coal ?" In reply
we will say, that we believe it is of
doubtful expediency for a railroad
company to engage in any but its legi-
innate business OF transportation but,
further, that this is not a question to
ask of us, but of the constitution of
the state. We know of no principle
of jurisprudence which admits of a
violation of the law by q corporation
while it Furnishes similar infractions
by an individual.
There is no good reason why there
should be the least i'll feeling between
the people of Lexington and the Mis-
souri, Pacific Railway. They are mutu-
ally dependent. Their interests are in
common, aud instead of the cultivation
of auimosities there should subsist be-
tween them the friendliest relations.
In order to secure these the company
has but to obey the law, and treat
shippers fairly.